Loading
Latest News |
(See all)

Latest News

CU Comments on Proposed FEC Multistate Independent Expenditure Rules

Citizens United letter to FEC - Citizens United is backing a proposed Federal Election Commission rule change aimed at streamlining the reporting procedure for independent expenditures in connection with the presidential nominating process, calling it "a major improvement over the current reporting scheme."

Citizens United letter to FEC re: proposed rule change by Citizens United on Scribd


WSJ: The Free Speech States

What do Alabama, Nebraska, Oregon and Utah have in common?

America’s media are obsessed with Washington, but in our federal system much of the law-writing takes place in the 50 states. This is one reason to welcome a new index detailing how well each state protects the First Amendment right to engage in political speech.

The Institute for Free Speech this week will release its first Free Speech Index, which is a report card on how every state treats political contributions. The ranking is based on the limits a state places on a person or group’s right to donate to political candidates. The scores rank from 0% to 100% and compare contribution limits based on factors such as population.

The results confound the normal blue-red divide. The top five finishers, all with a 100% score, are: Alabama, Nebraska, Oregon, Utah and Virginia. All “permit individuals, political parties, and PACs to contribute unlimited sums to the candidates, parties, and causes of their choice,” and ditto for unions and corporations. This should be a clue that allowing people to donate money in politics is not a fast lane to rule by Republicans.

The bottom feeders are notable, too, and a shout out to New Jersey for finishing 34th, instead of its usual dead last on any index about freedom. The least free are another odd assembly: Maryland, Colorado, Alaska, West Virginia and Kentucky. Alaska’s limits are so stringent that they’re caught up in federal court. In Colorado, individuals can donate a mere $200 to a state legislature seat. Only Montana’s limit is lower.

Read more...

Citizens United statement opposing government spending bill:

"The proposed $1.3 trillion government spending bill is more business as usual from career politicians on Capitol Hill. First of all, no one can thoroughly analyze a 2,200 page bill in two days. Our national debt just passed $21 trillion and this is yet another example of the irresponsible stewardship of taxpayer funds. Furthermore, this bill contains funding for Planned Parenthood and a tunnel  between New York and New Jersey but barely any funding for the border wall. The addiction of legislating from crisis to crisis and shutdown to shutdown must end. This is precisely why Congress has a 15 percent approval rating."

CU and CUF joined forces with other conservative organizations in filing an amicus brief on DACA

Citizens United and Citizens United Foundation joined forces with other conservative organizations in filing an amicus brief urging the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York to overturn a U.S. District Court judge’s order imposing a nationwide injunction that prohibits the Trump Administration from dismantling former President Obama’s DACA program – a program allows certain aliens to remain in the United States despite being here illegally  – during the pendency of a lawsuit challenging the termination of the program.

Citizens United & Citizens United Foundation Amicus Brief in 2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals Re: DACA by Citizens United on Scribd


Wash Times: Obama aide started Christopher Steele-FBI Alliance

A senior Barack Obama State Department official gave the green light to an FBI agent in 2016 to meet with dossier writer Christopher Steele, a meeting that touched off a relationship that would fuel the ongoing investigation into possible Donald Trump-Russia election collusion.

And, the sensational Steele allegation that led to an FBI wiretap on Trump volunteer Carter Page came from “pillow talk” with the lover of a Kremlin official, a new book says.

The disclosure that Victoria Nuland started the process is contained in “Russian Roulette,” a new book out on Tuesday by Yahoo News report Michael Isikoff and Mother Jones magazine’s David Corn.

Two committees, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Judiciary Committee, are investigating how Obama officials promoted Mr. Steele’s 35-page dossier. It makes a series of criminal charges against President Trump and his associates, contending there was an “extensive conspiracy” between them and the Kremlin. This supposed collusion has not been substantiated publicly. House Intelligence committee republicans on Monday said their 14-month investigation found no collusion.

Read more...

Reuters: Citizens United loses free speech appeal over New York donor rules

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Thursday threw out a constitutional challenge by the conservative group Citizens United to New York state’s requirement that registered charities disclose their donors annually.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan rejected claims that the requirement violated the First Amendment because it intimidated donors from contributing, cutting off money needed to conduct free speech, and was a prior restraint on the ability to solicit donations.

Writing for a 3-0 panel, Circuit Judge Rosemary Pooler said New York has important interests in stopping fraud and abuse by charities, and requiring them to disclose names, addresses and contributions of their largest donors makes enforcement easier.

“While we think it plausible that some donors will find it intolerable for law enforcement officials to know where they have made donations, we see no reason to believe that this risk of speech chilling is more than that which comes with any disclosure regulation,” Pooler wrote.

The court also found no reason to believe that New York and its Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, a Democrat, enforced the disclosure requirement “in anything but a uniformly content-neutral fashion.”

Citizens United was also the plaintiff in the landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case allowing unlimited independent spending by corporations and labor unions in election campaigns.

It advocates for limited government, free enterprise and strong families.

Read more...

Statement of Michael Boos, Citizens United Vice President and General Counsel, on today’s ruling by a three judge panel of the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals

Statement of Michael Boos, Citizens United Vice President and General Counsel, on today's ruling by a three judge panel of the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upholding the dismissal of the organization’s legal challenge to the New York Attorney General's requirement that charities disclose their top supporters to his office as a pre-condition to soliciting contributions in New York.

Michael Boos statement:

"We are extremely disappointed by today's adverse ruling. We suffered a similar fate when we challenged the federal ban on corporate sponsored political speech, but were ultimately vindicated at the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. As to today's ruling, we are carefully evaluating all of our options, including a possible petition for a rehearing before the full appeals court or an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will be making a decision in due course."


Citizens United files FOIA lawsuit vs. State Department

Citizens United files FOIA lawsuit vs. State Department for former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland’s emails and other records. 

Citizens United v. State Dept. FOIA Lawsuit (Victoria Nuland Emails, Etc.) by Citizens United on Scribd


Citizens United files amicus brief in support of the Trump Admin

The lower court's ruling that Pres. Trump can't cancel DACA is a classic example of liberal judicial activism at its worst. Here's our amicus brief in support of the Trump Admin:

Citizens United Amicus Brief in U.S. Department of Homeland Security v. Regents Univ. of California by Citizens United on Scribd


Wash Times: Eight years after Obama’s unusual State of the Union attack, Citizens United endures

The Capitol’s chambers are no strangers to violence, though fortunately the anniversary of the last canings has passed the sesquicentennial mark. It was only eight years ago, however, that President Obama chose to go after Supreme Court justices in that arena.  The occasion was his first State of the Union address and the topic was Citizens United, a case the justices had decided in a 5-4 ruling a week earlier, dealing an uppercut to the campaign finance reform movement by ruling that interest groups’ political spending is protected speech under the First Amendment.

The decision rocked politics, and Mr. Obama predicted it would “open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.” In the first election after the ruling, spending did soar. Cash in congressional races leaped 46 percent and continued to tick up in the years since. But spending on presidential elections has dropped since the ruling, challenging Mr. Obama prediction of runaway campaigns.

“I think the impact was enormously exaggerated by opponents of the decision right from the beginning,” said lawyer Ted Olson, who argued the case before the Supreme Court on behalf of the plaintiffs.

That was about what Citizens United expected when it went to court in the first place. In 2008, the conservative group tried to air a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton, who at that time was the favorite to win the Democratic nomination for president. The group wanted to run ads touting the film and its blockbuster title, “Hillary: The Movie.” At the time, however, federal law prohibited a corporation from airing the ads, deeming them anti-Clinton electioneering subject to the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance restrictions.

“When we first got to the Supreme Court, our main interest was just to show the documentary and some ads,” said Michael Boos, the executive vice president and general counsel of Citizens United. Conservatives — including President George W. Bush, who signed it into law — believed the courts would declare McCain-Feingold unconstitutional, eliminating its prohibition of corporations using their “general treasury” dollars to fund any “electioneering communications” within 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election.

Read more...

  You are viewing Page: 1 of 156
    
Subscribe RSS

Latest Updates

CU Comments on Proposed FEC Multistate Independent Expenditure Rules

Citizens United letter to FEC - Citizens United is backing...

Citizens United statement opposing government spending bill:

"The proposed $1.3 trillion government spending bill is more business...

CU and CUF joined forces with other conservative organizations in filing an amicus brief on DACA

Citizens United and Citizens United Foundation joined forces with other...

Statement of Michael Boos, Citizens United Vice President and General Counsel, on today’s ruling by a three judge panel of the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals

Statement of Michael Boos, Citizens United Vice President and General...

CU In The News

WSJ: The Free Speech States

What do Alabama, Nebraska, Oregon and Utah have in common?

Wash Times: Obama aide started Christopher Steele-FBI Alliance

A senior Barack Obama State Department official gave the green...

Reuters: Citizens United loses free speech appeal over New York donor rules

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Thursday...

Wash Times: Eight years after Obama’s unusual State of the Union attack, Citizens United endures

The Capitol’s chambers are no strangers to violence, though fortunately...

David Bossie at CPAC 2017

© 2018 - Citizens United - 202-547-5420
1006 Pennsylvania Ave SE - Washington, DC 20003
Privacy Policy